I’m torn on this issue. Religious (or, really, any) oppression should be fought wherever it is found. But what happens when France decides that Christians wearing cross necklaces or Jews wearing yarmulkes are being “oppressed” and forbids them from wearing articles of their faith? If women are truly being forced to wear these articles of faith, find ways to heavily punish those forcing women to wear them. But does France know where to draw the line between protecting people and suppressing expressions of religious faith? To orthodox Muslim women, forbidding the hijab would be like “liberating” women by forcing them to walk around in bikinis.
I was thinking the same thing. What if a women freely chooses to wear a burqa? Doesn’t France have freedom of religion and freedom of expression. As much as I see the burqa a sign of oppression for women, I’m not sure passing law outlawing it is appropriate?
Islam is not a religion; it’s a system of law.
In France, according to the law in existence already, La Loi Sur La Voile, all “ostentatious” displays of religion are forbidden in government facilities, such as schools, some businesses, Post Office, etc.
Crosses and yarmulkers are included along with the Islamic veil.
So, a woman wearing a cross, or a man wearing a yarmulker cannot be employed by the government, or attend a public school or university.
If one is to have freedom of religious expression, it must be for all.
The Dean of NYU Law School is an Orthodox Jew who wears a yarmulker. So are many doctors, and heads of departments in major medical schools and hospitals. Many women in all walks of life wear crosses. I personally wear a cross every day.
I look at it this way: in the US, with the Burka and hijab, at least we know who and where these people are . We can also judge whether there is an increase.